Now conferre these places together ād you shall perceyue, that the laste expoundeth the fyrste clerely. Fyrste he sayeth, dost thou see breade and wyne? I answere by the seconde, nay. For the inwarde eyes as soone as they see the breade, thynke not of it, but of the thynge it selfe that is sygnyfyed therby. And so he seeth it and seeth it not. He seeth it with hys outwarde and carnall eyes, but hys inwarde eyes seeth it not. That is to saye: regarde not the breade or thynke not vpon it. Euen as we commonlye saye, when we playe a game necglygentlye (by my truthe I see not what I do) meanynge that our myndes is not vpon that thynge whiche we see with our outwarde eyes. And lykewyse we maye answere the nexte parte, where he sayeth.
|The exposycyō of S. Chrisosto, texte.| Do they departe from thē in to the draughte, as other meates do? Nay for sothe sayde I. For other meates do onelye come to nouryshe the bodye, and to departe in to the draught: But thys meate that I here receyue, is spyrytuall meate, receyued with faythe, and nourysheth vs euerlastynglye bothe bodye and soule, and neuer entereth into the draughte. And euen as before the outwarde eyes do see the breade, and yet the inwarde eyes do not regarde that or thynke vpon it: So lykewyse the outwarde man dygesteth the breade, and casteth it in to the draughte. And yet the inwarde mā doth not regarde that nor thynke vpō it: But thynketh vpon the thynge it selfe that is sygnyfyed by that breade.
|The true meanynge of Chrisostomes wordes.| And therfore sayde Chrysostome euen a lytle before the wordes whiche they here alleaged. Lyfte vp your mynde and hartes (sayde he) whereby he monysheth vs, to loke vpon and consyder those heauenly thynges, whiche are represented and sygnyfyed by the breade and wyne, and not to marke the breade and wyne in it selfe.
Here they wyll saye vnto me, that that is not Chrisostomes mynde. For by hys example he playnlye sheweth that there remayneth no breade nor wyne. That I denye. For the example in thys place proueth no more but that ye shall not thynke vpon the breade and wyne, no more then yf they were not there, but onelye vpon that thynge whiche is sygnyfyed by thē. And that ye maye euydently perceyue by the wordes folowynge where he sayeth, thynke that the mysteryes are consumed by the substaunce of the bodye.
|Soluciō| Now whyther Chrisostome thought that there remayned breade or none, bothe wayes shall our purpose be proued. Fyrst yf he thought there remayned styll breade and wyne, thē we haue our purpose. Now yf he thought that the breade and wyne remayned not, but were chaunged, thē are the breade and wyne neyther mysteryes nor sacramentes of the bodye and bloode of Christe. For that that is not, cā neyther be mysterye nor sacrament.
|Conclusyon.| Fynalle yf he spake of the outwarde apperaunce of breade: then we knowe that that remayneth styll and is not consumed by the substaunce of the bodye. And therfore he muste neades be vnderstonde as I take hym.
I thynke many men wonder how I can dye in thys artycle, seynge that it is no necessary artycle of our faythe, for I graunte that neyther parte is an artycle necessary to be beleued vnder payne of dampnacyon, but leaue it as a thynge indyfferent, to thynke therin as God shall instyll in euery mans mynde, and that neyther parte condempne other for thys matter, but receyue eche other in brotherly loue, reseruynge eche others infyrmyte to God.
|Beholde the cause of my death.| The cause of my deathe is thys, because I can not in conscyence abiure and swere, that our Prelates opynyon of the Sacramente (that is) that the substaunce of breade ād wyne is verely chaunged into the fleshe and bloode of our sauyoure Iesus Christ is an vndoubted artycle of the faythe, necessarye to be beleued vnder payne of dampnacyon.
|Note.| Now thoughe thys opynyon were in dede true (whiche thynge they cā neyther proue true by scrypture nor doctours) yet coulde I not in conscyence graunte that it shulde be an artycle of the faythe necessarye to be beleued, etc. For there are many verytees, whiche yet may be no soche artycles of our faythe. It is true that I laye in Irons whan I wrote thys, howbeit I wolde not receyue thys truthe, for an artycle of our fayth. For you may thynke the contrary without all Ieoperdy of dampnacyon.
¶ The cause why I cā not beleue their opynyon of transmutacyon or transubstanciacyon whether ye wyll, is thys.